Think of the great leaders of the world – the giants of
industry, the financial wizards, the healers, the inventors, the
humanitarians. We look to our leaders to
set the pace, and to change the world.
Sometimes, the leaders upon whom we rely let us down, or worse, lead us
down a horrible route. We follow,
largely because we hope, and even believe, that they know where they are going,
and what is best for us. It is a habit
engrained into us, from the moment that we look to our parents for support,
protection and guidance. Parents, too,
occasionally fail.
Leadership has proven to be essential to the growth of this
world. Yet, it is leadership that may also be destroying our environment. Many of us would love to be able to be
involved in making a difference, and seek leaders of varying capacities and
capabilities to show us how to do so.
Since Greenpeace began tackling whaling issues, or PETA began speaking
out in unusual ways against animal cruelty, hundreds of thousands of followers
have taken up the cause. Slowly, the
world is responding positively.
Once Microsoft and Macintosh set the stage for a major shift
in technology and personal computing, that aspect of our globe saw burgeoning
innovations that now are commonplace, as other inventors and visionaries
discovered unique applications of the computer technology. At the same time,
financial leaders, wrongly motivated by greed instead of responsibility, drew
countless other would-be millionaires into investment strategies that nearly
caused the collapse of global markets.
Leaders in one venue, though, are not necessarily equipped
to lead in others. Prime Minister
Winston Churchill, credited with saving the United Kingdom against the
aggression of Germany’s Hitler, was promptly discarded as leader of the UK once
the war was over. He was seen as lacking
peacetime skills. On the other hand,
President Eisenhower succeeded on the battlefield and in the political area.
Government offers the most distinct opportunity to choose
who you believe is best to guide you, and
for politicians to garner an army of followers. Too often, though, we choose our political
leaders based on likeability, or worse, the ability to deceive us. Yet, the
very nature of politics is one of compromise, which , in turn, leads to muted
versions of ideals. Consider the failing
of the 2010-12 US Congress, gridlocked because each party was unable or
unwilling to moderate its dogmatic approach to issues of concern.
Politics, however, also offers the opportunity for
intelligent citizens to scrutinize the leaders, compel change in them and
impact on policies. Whether one agrees
with their values or not, the Tea Party illustrates the power of followers who
exercise their option to accept only the positions important to them.
The dichotomy between leadership and following, and the
influence each has on the other is magnified in politics, because largely it is
public. The paradox of a leader
following public opinion and a follower dictating the direction for leaders to
lead also reveals the value of following.
We all have the capacity to change the world. However, most of us fail to achieve our
potential to contribute, because we doubt the value of our input and wait for
leadership that coincides with our objectives.
Instead, we can make the most difference when we take the time to
analyze various positions to determine those that most closely approximate our
own, and then become involved with that aspect of our lives. By committing to a cause, we have taken the
most critical step in changing the world.
Once involved, we can let our leaders know how we want them to adjust
their positions and, if they prove unwilling to do so, we can undertake the
process of shaping and grooming a new leader.
Leadership has its place, but its primary value is in reflecting and
promoting the position of its followers.
The keys, therefore, to changing the part of the world that
we want altered are simple: good values, solid leadership, and followers who
choose and shape their leaders thoughtfully.
